The Evolution Deceit
The fact that Darwin was aware of Cambrian fossils and thought that the Cambrian period dated back 60 million years:
- Darwin imagined that the Cambrian period referred to a time some 60 million years before his day. Stephen Jay Gould said that “Nothing distressed him [Darwin] more than the Cambrian explosion, the coincident appearance of almost all complex organic designs..." Darwin felt that distress over fossils that he imagined dated back only 60 million years. Had he known that they actually dated back 540 million years, he would probably have abandoned his theory entirely.
- Examples can be cited of Cambrian fossils that were around in Darwin’s time. Because Cambrian fossils were first unearthed in Darwin’s day, and he was well aware of these.
The presence of oxygen in the primordial atmosphere makes the chemical reactions that form the cell impossible:
- Oxygen in the primordial atmosphere will immediately oxidize and destroys the molecules that form. In addition, the reactions that form the compounds that existed before that cannot take place in the presence of oxygen. The reactions required for protein and DNA to form cannot take place in the presence of oxygen. (William Dembski and Jonathan Wells, How To Be An Intellectually Fullfilled Atheist (Or Not), 2008, p. 27)
It is impossible for amino acids to inter-react in the primordial atmosphere:
- Under normal conditions, amino acids do not react with one another. But they immediately react with other substances, such as sugar.
- If, as Darwinists claim, amino acids formed by chance on the primeval Earth, then they would not float around waiting to combine with the correct amino acids. Instead, they would enter into reactions with different compounds and become biologically unusable through being bonded to them. As a result, all there would be is a chemical soup.
The mutations described as neutral are in fact deleterious, but for various reasons Darwinists try to depict these mutations as beneficial:
- An article titled SILENT MUTATIONS SPEAK, published in Nature magazine on 21 December, 2006, showed that the 1% of mutations thought to have no effect at all did in fact have effects. (http://www.nature.com/news/2006/061221/full/news061218-12.html)
- According to the research, neutral mutations (described as silent mutations) damage a protein by impacting on its two amino acids. The protein pump that expels proteins outside the cell is damaged.
- Darwinists claim that treatment such as chemotherapy has a more rapid effect on the damaged part of the cell and that this is an example of useful mutation.
- But the important thing here is that mutations described as neutral in fact damage proteins. In order to be useful they need to be able to bestow new structures on an organism. But that is impossible.
- This is like opening fire on someone. Ninety-nine out of 100 bullets shatter the body. One bullet may, however, have a healing effect by destroying an infection in the body. But the person concerned has in any case been blown to smithereens.